America's #1 Balance Bike Destination

02 March 2006

By GILLIAN FLACCUS, Associated Press Writer Wed Mar 1, 7:54 AM ETIRVINE, Calif. - A student panel discussion that included a display of the Prophet Muhammad cartoons descended into chaos, with one speaker calling Islam an "evil religion" and audience members nearly coming to blows......Tensions quickly escalated when the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of the conservative Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny, said that Islam was an "evil religion" and that all Muslims hate America.

People repeatedly interrupted the talk and, at one point, campus police removed two men, one of them a Muslim, after they nearly came to blows.

Later, panelists were cheered when they referred to Muslims as fascists and accused mainstream Muslim-American civil rights groups of being "cheerleaders for terror."... More...

This comes as no surprise. It was only a matter of time for Muslim Americans to stand and be heard. Regrettably, a deliberate provocation by the University of California student body was the last thing we needed, just when things were cooling down. Enough already. Stop with the cartoons! Why even go there when you know that 1.5 billion people don't appreciate it? How many times did the networks apologize for the "wardrobe malfunction" of the previous Super Bowl? The number of Americans who were offended by Janet Jackson's breast compared against the number of Muslims who are upset about the cartoons is well...beyon compare to say the least. Yet the networks and Janet and the NFL all apologized profusely and repeatedly for something so trivial and stupid. Apparently 1.5 million offended Muslims is not sufficient to put an end to the cartoons. No, instead it's being force-fed to Muslims in the name of free speech, no matter what the consequences, no matter how clear it is that the faith of nearly 1/4 of the world's population is under assault. I've condemned all of the violent protest, boycotts and flag-burning, but it is also necessary to condemn those who perpetuate the things which got us into this mess, never mind the absence of a sincere apology or even a common sense understanding of why so many people are hurt and angry. There used to be virtues such as manners. Look into it! Better yet: Do Unto Others... Go to MAIN PageGo to AMERIKAN TURKS Discussion Forum- DEBATE!Go to AMERIKAN TURKS Yahoo Group- NETWORK!

16 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Although I agree it's not right to gratuitously offend Muslims (As a Christian I am offended by Piss Christ and other such works of "art"). But, I think a lot of folks are publishing the cartoons to assert the right to do so. The protests by many Muslims has been incredibly offensive (Europe's Holocaust is coming, Behead those who insult Islam, placards like that). So, they're are saying in essence - You won't tell me what to do! It's a sad situation, but it's one more piece of evidence that the Islamic world and the West are incompatible.

What's incompatible here is free speech and respect. At our workplace we don't walk around telling our co-workers how full of contempt we are towards them, do we? The truth is thusly concealed. Is this a violation of free speech? Is the risk of losing your job over telling off a co-worker un-constitutional, even if it harms said co-worker's mental health?

Sometimes the truth, or the expression of a truthful interpretation, is hard to swallow, it's painful and it hurts. Beneath all anger is hurt.

You have the balls to live in America and call yourself an "AMERIkAN TURK"..! Go back and preach your BULLSHIT in your own fucked up country...! Piss off we certainly don't need you and your bullshit in this FANTASTIC COUNTRY...Ahhh but you won't because you have it so much better over here. WTF... PISSOFF before I BOMB your HOUSE and hopefully your in it...! ASS

"All American Guy":Anonymous cowards like you don't like what they're hearing from a fellow American and they want to curb his freedom of speech!? How trite! I was born here in the US, and judging from your personal attack and your language, you were born in a barn. You have every right to say whatever you like, even if it exhibits symptoms of foot-in-mouth disorder. If I believed otherwise, I'd delete your comment. Take some of your own medicine- the knife cuts two ways. 'Ta.

"Yeah Right"... FELLOW AMERICAN... Precisely...! Tell me WHY did you have the right..!to soil our soil to be born in this fab country? and why did your family come to "AMERICA" OH..! forgive me i think I know that question...! "Born in America"..? You don't deserve the privilege exactly for you it is a "PRIVILEGE"!!!! The way you write your blog it seems to me your fellow co workers would be mighty interested in what you had to say!! "NOW WHO'S THE COWARD" Go on let your voice be heard in your work place "SNEEK"!!!!

"Masked contempt for co-workers" is a para-phrase borrowed from an AMERICAN movie called "American Beauty", you ignoramus. I suppose that if YOU had a job other than defacing my blog, you would hug and kiss all of your co-workers daily?

OH..! I'm disappointed is that all you can come back at me with...! How poor... Ooops.. that's what you would have been if you hadn't been born in "AMERICA"!!!. Oh.. no! now your SNEEKING around me. That's right jackass I'm worldly and on business in the UK! Not far from Bird flu Turkey!!! Ooops It'll be a very sad day and hope I never see the day Turkey joins the EU!

Does the dream include having my house bombed by bigots such as yourself? You did make such a threat after all. I have half a mind to call Homeland Security right now. Such threats are taken very seriously.

Last I checked "Piss off" and "fab" were Brit expressions. Are you impersonating an American? No shame!

Here in America, we spell it "sneak", not "sneek".

Clearly, living here is YOUR dream, not mine, because you're a Brit and not an American. Prove me wrong.

I have been trying to craft a response to your post, but in the end, I'll let Flemming Rose speak for himself.

... "UPDATE. Flemming Rose explains why he published the cartoons in the first place:

Has Jyllands-Posten insulted and disrespected Islam? It certainly didn’t intend to. But what does respect mean? When I visit a mosque, I show my respect by taking off my shoes. I follow the customs, just as I do in a church, synagogue or other holy place. But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy." ...

What is it called when a Muslim visits you in your home, and you choose NOT to serve pork, choose NOT to serve or consume alcohol, and choose NOT to take out a drawing tablet and doodle pictures of Muhammed? Is this also 'submission'? Or is it simply respect?

Please try to understand that these cartoons are as offensive to Muslims as a swastika is to a Jew.

My home is a private domain and not a public one. As your host and friend, I would be happy to make sure your needs and wants are met.

Given that many of my friends are vegetarian, questions like 'What can you eat?' are already a common enough experience.

But what is the difference between demanding that the cartoons not be published in the public domain and demanding that all bar-be-que restaurants, which also exist in the public domain, be shut down, since Muslims can't eat pork?

There are a large number of people who are not offended by the cartoons and would like to see them; just as there are many people who enjoy eating pork & ribs and would like to visit the restaurants that serve them.

One has to ask a couple of questions about the cartoon controversy. Does it actually say there will be no depictions of the prophet in the Koran(Quran)? Have all of the people who are rioting even seen the cartoons or are they merely incited to riot? Aren't certain religious groups in Iraq more than hypocritical since they are publishing cartoons about Jews or the Holocaust? Wasn't the publishing of the cartoons completely legal under the law in Denmark to begin with? It seems to me that the underlying incitement may well be indicative of what the de facto American Philosopher Eric Hoffer called the work of “true believers”. A true believer or what some people would call a fanatic would probably rather you deal with them as a fanatic yourself, what they seem to have difficulty with is dealing with people who are luke warm or even indifferent aka a satirization of what they do, then it really seems to tic them off.

" All the true believers [fanatics] of our time-whetherCommunist, Nazi, Fascist, Japanese or Catholic-declaimedvolubly (and the Communists still do) [i.e.. 1951] on thedecadence of the Western democracies. The burden of theirtalk is that in the democracies people are too soft, too pleasure-loving and too selfish to die for a nation, a God or a holy cause.This lack of a readiness to die, we are told, is indicative of aninner rot- a moral and biological decay. The democracies areold, corrupt and decadent. They are no match for the virilecongregations of the faithful who are about to inherit the Earth."

There is a huge distinction here. Going around insulting your co-workers isn't a valid comparison. There are critiques of the Christian faith that are downright disrespectful, but the right to display or express such an idea is important in our society. It is because we have the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion that we can choose to reject ideas. If the author/illustrator intended to state his objection to the faith based on his interpretation, then he should be allowed that. It is not he who is intolerant, it is the people who ironically play into the very critique he creates. Muslims who have protested violently or non-violently are intolerant of a difference in opinion, which in this case is a rejection of their ideology. It is important to understand the distinction between a people and their ideas. We can and should be able to criticize ideas. It is wrong to berate ethnicities/nationalities/gender, but it is mistaken to think that an ideology is beyond criticism. That sentiment is extreme authoritarianism and dominance on behalf of the radical, submission on behalf of the unwitting prospective dhimmi, not acceptance or tolerance or any one of those progressive values.